I received the following message/advertisement in my LinkedIn account asking me to defend major polluters of my own water supply! You can read my response following the advertisement. Interestingly, I was unable to reply to this advertisement from my inbox in LinkedIn. So, I sent an email. I am also posting the information here in case anyone else feels compelled to respond as well.
I wanted to reach out to you about a growing threat to the future of the medical device industry and your business.
I’m writing specifically about the future availability of fluoropolymers. Fluoropolymers play a critical role in medical device technologies, from pacemakers and catheters to coatings for surgical tools and device packaging. Their unique combination of properties helps reduce the risk of infection and other complications. Without fluoropolymers, many of today’s medical devices simply would not exist or be as effective.
There is, however, an aggressive movement to enact extremely broad legislation treating all PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) as a single class and restricting their use, which includes fluoropolymers. The advocates for such policies would have lawmakers treat the diverse family of PFAS chemistries as one substance, even though science shows that’s clearly not the case.
All PFAS are not the same, and it is neither scientifically accurate nor responsible to regulate them as such. This summer, a rigorous, peer-reviewed study, building upon earlier research and published in an academic journal, demonstrated conclusively that 96% of the types of fluoropolymers on the global market meet internationally recognized criteria for identifying polymers of low concern to human health or the environment and that fluoropolymers are a distinct category of PFAS that should not be grouped with other PFAS for regulatory purposes.
Overly broad regulation of PFAS as a single class is a serious threat to both medical device manufacturers and, most importantly, users. Regardless of existing FDA device approvals, it could become difficult to produce medical devices as we know them today. Technology should not go backwards. If PFAS chemistries are banned, your industry may be impacted immediately, and the next big innovation in the field may be delayed or prohibited from future use.
I encourage you to learn more about the uses of fluoropolymers in your industry so that your business is prepared to respond to broad anti-PFAS initiatives that could threaten the medical device industry. I invite you to use the Performance Fluoropolymer Partnership’s page as a starting point in your research. Please also feel free to reach out to me if you’d like to join or support our efforts to ensure that PFAS regulation is scientifically sound.
Director, Product Communications
American Chemistry Council
Here is my response:
I received a message/ad from you on LinkedIn about protecting the medical device industry in its use of PFAS. Most people do not need medical devices, but everyone needs water. I live in Minnesota, and our drinking water is polluted extensively with PFAS thanks to the medical device industry and other parts of the war machine. We, the people, are the ones who need protection from you. Do you even understand how sick people have been made, innocent people, even children from PFAS contamination? Do you understand how the industry does not pay for its damages? How can you even sleep at night?
Dr. Marie Kube, Ph.D.
Chemist and Biologist
If you, or a loved one, have developed cancer as a result of perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) exposure as well as government and private entities who are remediating PFAS contamination, you may be entitled to compensation: